Money issues, are we being mean?

[TryingToSleepHere]

Sorry, this is long!

DH's exW called tonight and said that DSS needs new shoes for school ASAP as the current ones have broken. She asked if DH could take DSS to get new ones while he's with us this weekend.

DH has previously had issues with this kind of thing, in order not to drip feed, the current situation is as follows: DH and exW split approx 7 years ago, it's always been amicable between them. DH agreed to pay a generous amount of monthly maintenance, way over 3x CSA recommendations, it's enough to pay the whole rent on exW's house. Also pays for all extra-curricular activities. He puts away extra money each month for DSS' savings. Ex has also frequently asked him for contributions to extras such as school trips, presents, shoes and uniform.

DH and I have since had a DD together and have had to tighten our belt and save money in any way we can. We're not in debt or anything but we're only getting by through doing things like buying clothes (for DD and I) and toys second hand, and shoes from the local factory shop (all ok, just last season's styles!) in order to stay afloat and not push our finances too far. So nothing too dramatic but a definite change from how it used to be. We planned for this though and accept this is the case because of our own decision to have a child.

The only thing that DH has said to exW is that he's no longer able to help with extras like presents, uniform and shoes, i.e. things that are not "unexpected, one-off" events. School trips etc he will still pay for and the amount of maintenance will stay the same.

ExW said this was fine and she understood and accepted that the maintenance should cover everything as it is such a high amount when you take all her outgoings into account. However, she has since had a baby with her new DH and all hell has broken loose over this pair of shoes! Basically she is now saying she can't afford new shoes for DSS and has asked DH to go shopping this weekend and get them for him. She's even saying that she doesn't want DH to take DSS to the factory shoe shop as she doesn't want him wearing "cheap shoes". They are cheaper (normally cost £20ish) but no problems with the quality etc and you'd never know the style was not this season's style...they're standard black school shoes! She wants DH to go to a shop where the minimum price is around £60 per pair.

I've not said anything as I know that DH gets really upset when it looks like I'm criticising his exW, not out of loyalty to her or anything but because he feels a bit stuck in the middle and although he agrees with me, he hates the resulting confrontation with exW. To be fair to him though, he is very good at tackling things and has said he'll make it clear that if he takes DSS shoe shopping, that he'll say he'll either get factory shop shoes and pay for them as a one-off out of goodwill, or if he is forced to get shoes elsewhere then he'll need the money from his exW as we can't afford £60 on just one pair of shoes :(

I feel really bad for DH being put into this position. Does anyone have any experience of this and what are your honest thoughts? Are we being mean?

BTW 50:50 doesn't mean no mantenance, it depends on income.

In both hosueholds. Could actually end up in your favour.

Personally I wouldn't mention her new partner or baby. Doesn't matter if the new bloke is a millionaire, maintenance still has to be paid. It definitely does need reducing but I would be really angry if my ex decided not to pay me as much when I got married or when if DH and I have a baby.

Spuffy - you would want to be financially dependent to this extent on an ex partner when/if you re-married?

And when your new partner asks how you can afford those new things you say oh yeah my ex paid for it. And you'd expect that to be ok with your new partner?

There are some people who will sponge, I would have thought that in most cases where an ex has re-married they would be wanting to be as least dependent on their former partner as possible.

In this case, if the money was being put into a fund for the child and only essential living costs taken out, the rest saved for his future, then I could see how mum could be a little peeved at losing some of that. But as far as I cantell it's not.

She's milking him, their son's not seeing the money. Her new baby is it seems.

What kind of 9 year old needs £60 shoes?! She either accepts the £20 ones or buys them herself and that's all there is to it.

I'm not financially dependent on my ex, not at all. But just because I'm married now doesn't mean my ex (or anyones ex) can shirk his emotional and financial duties to his child/children. These things remain no matter what parent marries/moves on.

There are a few issues here:

1. Your DP agreed to pay his EX maintenance as a level that they both accepted - nothing to do with you.
2. His circumstances have now changed and you resent him paying out more monies than you feel he should - because you now allege you and he are struggling. Apparently it was enough to pay the rent on a whole house - so circa £800pcm + the extras and before your new child came along there was not a problem.
3. The pair of shoes is irrelevant - he can buy whatever he wants and fundamentally I do not think this is what you are bothered about.
4. Your post suggests that he was paying circa £1000pcm and he could afford it, not sure how one child more suddenly means that you are struggling when previously you were not.

Sorry this does not add up.

Whatever you must be in a totally different part of the country to us as your figures are a long, long way away from what the reality is. I realise the amount set was nothing to do with me at the time although I disagree with it being nothing to do with me - the level of maintenance means the amount spent on my daughter is much less than on DSS.

Totally agree about the shoes - this is irrelevant but was the catalyst that brought my resentment to the fore as I felt it was taking the mickey to ask for them on top of everything else.

And yes our circumstances really have changed a lot. What with childcare costs and my job changing since going back after mat leave, we are down by over £1000 per month compared to what we earned before having DD. So yes, our finances have changed drastically compared to before having a baby. Sorry if that doesn't add up if you use figures relating to your part of the country but it's all true and very relevant to our personal situation.

Oops, should say I disagree with it being nothing to do with me now

We pay the CSA amount for DH's 2 DC. I know some people think it's a pathetic amount but we find it to be a massive dent in his salary, I wouldn't be happy to pay anything more than we have to.
I don't receive any maintenance from my ex (he's on benefits but works for cash in hand), even if I did I couldn't imagine asking him to buy shoes for DS. He's in my care and I'm responsible for buying everything he needs.
If she's receiving all that money off your DH, plus has a new DH and will be getting child benefit, possibly tax credits..she's going seriously wrong if she can't afford to scrape together enough for a pair of shoes...even if they're just cheapo one's.
I'd be tempted to reduce maintenance payments, she's taking the absolute piss and your DC is missing out on things because so much is going to her.

He really needs to use this opportunity to reduce his maintenance to the CSA amount. She is right royally taking the piss. But he needs to sort it out. It's stupid that you are scrimping whilst she is laughing all the way to the bank.

whatever21 I am also struggling to see how you don't see how an extra child affects the money available in a house hold so much? Kids are expensive, babies in particular, especially when having to pay for childcare.
That is why the CSA take new children in to account when calculating payments.
My DH agreed to pay half the mortgage + took on all their joint debts + CSA amount. The total came to about 80% of his salary (his wage varied month to month). He was living with his parents so had no bills, he just wanted to make sure his kids were looked after.
But just because that's what he agreed when they first split up, does that mean that's how it should stay forever? Even when she had numerous promotions and was earning twice as much as him? Even when she met another guy and moved him in? Should he have never remarried and had another child because he initially agreed to pay so much?

Situations change, people move on and with that some times financial arrangements need to change too.

Not mean by the sounds of it, but wrong to speculate on her financial circumstances and assume she's not paying a decent amount towards your dss's living costs.

Does sound like you need to revise finances. Afaik the CSA amount is derisory and so it's reasonable to pay over the odds. Perhaps if the ex-w is unreasonable then the best thing to do is work out what money you have as a family and what proportion is going on dss, to check if you're right about the unfairness and make anew arrangement.

You come across as worried for dss. Do you think he's being sidelined by his other family? Perhaps talk to your dh about ways to redress the balance at your end.